The spreads - afternoon report
May 5th, 2005-
Labour spread price starts to slip
For the first time since Tony Blair announced the election a month ago the Labour price on the spread markets has started to slip. The mid-afternoon fix from IG saw a two seat drop which means a four seat reduction in the projected majority.
This is not a major drop but it is significant and is the product of Labour backers not being as confident as they were this morning. There’s also been more money going on the Lib Dems.
Part of this was started by the morning’s batch of opinion polls - none of which had the 40+% shares for Labour that had helped the spread price to move upwards. The latest price from IG Index is 366-370 seats putting it alongside the Sporting Index price. Spreadfair , which is a much smaller market, is at 369.1-369.6.
All this causes a change in our Balance of Money prediction to a Labour majority of 90 seats.
IG Index have also reduced the Labour vote share percentage to 36.75-37.25%.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Well Well Well.
Tony Blair must be panicking.
Any significance in Oona going from 72-78 to 70-80?
2 Why?
4.- Sorry, my dry humour obviously didn’t come across!
Robert, we are now entering the Disinformation Zone. Everyone is going to panic at some point between now and ten o’clock
Come on John D 2. We are talking about small changes here. This is not a collapse but punters being a bit more cautious.
I think John was being ironic. Anyone who starts putting money on the results at this late stage based on the sorts of reports we are likely to get today is probably going to end up the poorer. As has been said elsewhere there is going to be a huge amount of disinformation flying round in the last few hours.
Profit taking?
Is it true historically the betting markets have underestimated the number of Labour Seats (size of majority) whilst the polls have over estimated? (point taken John, I think I am getting a bit nervous)
10 - I am pretty sure that is what happened in 2001. God knows why you are nervous Robert.
There is strong evidence the swing could be in the region of 10% to the Conservatives across the relevant marginals. In the postal ballots the swing to the Conservatives is 11.5%. Labour is heading for a major defeat.
Evidence for this is postal ballots in a number of marginals, and early exit poll data.
11. I think any Labour supporter who endured 1992 will be nervous at any election, regardless of what the polls say.
11, Money Sophia, I have a bit riding on my predition, plus I am a building surveyor, the building industry has done very well under labour, never seen a market like it
14 - That makes sense. My brother is a surveyor and is voting labour for the same reasons as you.
12 - Surely after the example of what happened when exit poll data leaked out during the US presidential election, the exit poll data in this election will be kept to those who need to know at MORI and NOP, and a small amount of people at the BBC and ITV?
12, A ramp by any other name, this is a quite sophisticated board so please do not try it on here,
9. Spot on. Smart punters will be locking in profits now which will move the markets completely independently of any election news.
Bill [12] - you can’t compare the postal votes you claim to have seen this time with the total poll last time. PVs have always favoured the Tories, which makes Labour’s rule changes even more bizarre…
Interesting letter in todays Mail. Heres an extract [errors and omissions excepted - I hand typed the extract]
“In 1992 John Major polled 14.1 million votes to gain an overall majority of 21. In 1997, Tony Blair polled 13.6 million votes to achieve a “landslide” majority of 179. Why? Because the conservative vote was down 4.5 million in 1992.
In 2001 Tony Blair polled 10.7 million votes, but still gained a majority of 166. The conservatives polled 8.4 million, another 1.2 million down. The missing conservatives didn’t vote Labour or Libdem-many just didn’t vote at all
The most worrying aspect nationally is the reduction in turnout - 77.7 in 1992, 71.4 in 1997 and just 59.4 (the lowest since 1945) in 2001″
Essentially what the writer is saying is that 5.7 million tory votes disappeared. Now I don’t entirely buy that, some ex tories did vote Labour/Lib Dems, many labour supporters in safe seats stayed at home (contented apathy) in 2001.
However, say roughly half of them 3 million, were tories who stayed at home in 1997 and 2001 and say half of these still won’t vote or have died, that leaves the potential for an extra 1.5 million tory voters this time, potentially without the opinion polls registering them since they would possibly have said conservative to opinion pollsters asking them in 1997/2001, even though they did not vote.
Assume now that this time the Lib dems have taken 500,000 votes off each of the tories and Labour compared with 2001.
Assume also that 500,000 people in safe Labour seats do vote this time fearing letting howard in by the back door
This leaves:
Conservative vote - up 1 million on 2001
Lib Dem Votes - up 1 million on 2001
Labour vote - same overall as 2001 but no longer higher in marginals.
If this happens it wont be a good night for Labour, even if the only voters from 2001 they lose are 500,000 to the lib dems.
Factor in some C1 C2 Lab Tory defections and UKIP getting less than 1% of the vote and it gets even more interesting.
20. See post 2.
Paul - how often do the bookies get it wrong ?
The evidence of a Labour defeat was always strong - Labour canvassers with decades of experience reported to me the worst canvass returns since 1983. The biggest swings against Labour will be in Scotland, the north, midlands, London, Kent and Essex.
It is a pity the opinion pollsters never believed there own data - adjusting headline figures to suit their bias. Non-existent Labour leads were thereby generated. The most notorious example of this was ICM - which began in 2004 ‘adjustments’ all others then followed - MORI, Populus, YouGov, BPIX and Harris.
Perhaps when pollsters operate by higher standards of integrity we will no longer see such attempts to make conclusions fit assumptions, ignoring the raw data, and favouring a pre-conceived idea that a trend continues indefinitely.
Most stock market bubbles in history have been caused by exactly the same assumption (e.g. the 2000-02 tech bubble, South China Sea Bubble, etc.). There is a dramatic reversal back to the Conservatives.
The evidence of a Labour defeat was always strong - Labour canvassers with decades of experience reported to me the worst canvass returns since 1983. The biggest swings against Labour will be in Scotland, the north, midlands, London, Kent and Essex.
It is a pity the opinion pollsters never believed there own data - adjusting headline figures to suit their bias. Non-existent Labour leads were thereby generated. The most notorious example of this was ICM - which began in 2004 ‘adjustments’ all others then followed - MORI, Populus, YouGov, BPIX and Harris.
Perhaps when pollsters operate by higher standards of integrity we will no longer see such attempts to make conclusions fit assumptions, ignoring the raw data, and favouring a pre-conceived idea that a trend continues indefinitely.
Most stock market bubbles in history have been caused by exactly the same assumption (e.g. the 2000-02 tech bubble, South China Sea Bubble, etc.). There is a dramatic reversal back to the Conservatives.
15, Sophia don’t know many people in the industry who will not be voting labour
22 - as often as the vast majority of punters put their money on the wrong horse
Take comments from rampers with disdain. The NOP/MORI 13,000 exit poll sample for bBC/ITV is being conducted under highly confidential conditions and results are still being collated. Wise players ignore rampers such as ‘Bill’ who suddenly pop up. You will see this in the next few hours and Internet security investigations in the financial services industry are familiar with this. BTW the weather is none too bad and turnout is probably up on 2001 by some way. LOL at the transparently obvious rampers!
Bill you are talking nonsense, it sounds like you are straw clutching something of which we have seen quite a bit of on this site over the last few weeks, there is a lot of evidence coming in of shaky hand syndrome which could lead to one or two surprises tonight
25 - Yes your right. My brother is taking the Toynbee to voting labour but coming from a different direction!
Bill seems to be the worst ramper, the post is completely nuts.
A genuine comment on turnout i am not a gambler, have just seen the early editions of the Sheffield evening newspaper they are suggesting turnout to be up on 2001 based on footfall in the polling stations and increase in postal votes. As the city comprises four Labour fortresses, one safe Labour and a LD seat in the university area I would definitely now expect turnout overall at the high end of expectations. PS ‘Sheffield Star’ if you wish to check their website
30 - http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=58&ArticleID=1018153
27, I do not think they are ramping in the traditional sense of the word I think they ramp to just to make themselves feel better, it’s as if they say their predictions they will come true.
But I accept that from now until the end the pros will be out in force, pedalling rumours all over the place, I never believe them but it does annoy me because like the aforementioned post it was so blatant
32-27-28. I have maintained all along that missing tory voters could deliver a shock. However 2 is so stunning that I do wonder if it is a ramp. However 10% does seem a bit of an excessive swing to be feasible so I think on balance of probability it is one to ignore until confirmed by another source (always the best way with rumours)
Sorry I meant 12 not 2
Has there been shome mistake surely re Press Association’s Declaration Times.Derbyshire South at midnight already quoted in press reports as early declaring. Also Richmond Yorks at 2am. Do n’t we mean 12/2 pm to-morrow?
LOL- “The biggest swings against Labour will be in Scotland, the north, midlands, London, Kent and Essex.”
So that covers just about every Labour seat then !
Maybe we should be expecting an 80 seat Tory majority !
24 Ramper Bill.Go away.So transparent’Labour canvassers with many years experience told me’.Yeah right.You don’t know anyone who votes Labour.Prat
24 BTW south sea bubble.Your education is also sadly lacking.Prat
Oh come on - it’s clear Bill’s just having a bit of fun. Bit surprised at the vigour at which he’s been pounced upon though. It’s almost as if the partisan Labour supporters aren’t quite as confident of their 120+ majority as they had made out
37, 38 - steady on - no-one likes a ramper, but let’s keep it civilised (-ish! :-))
Ray calm down. Just ignore it.
It has been claimed by some that to report the truth, is to ramp. Ramping is a stock market related term. Just as we lift a car with a car ramp, a ramper inflates the price of a stock artificially through false news. By this they imply the outcome of the election is being incorrectly ‘called’ by false news from the ramper. However for this to be a valid claim the news doubtable. It should not be possible to independently verify it. Sources must be non-existent.
The evidence you seek is not hard to find. Look at this site, and remind yourself of repeated warning from senior Labour party figures on national television, hear again those endless warning from BBC journalists on national television – ‘something is seriously wrong’, ‘ Labour sources say the facts on the ground are wholly at odds with the experience on the doorstep – they find no lead’.
They were simply forewarning of what was to come. Labour had lost and they knew it.
Furthermore, it is suggested that doubters go to ICM’s own website and check there raw data. The maths is not too complex. The headline figures generated by the same maths ICM used in 1997 and 2001, generate consistent and decisive Conservative leads through the campaign, and most of 2004. YouGov have repeatedly confessed to making the same ‘alterations’ to generate the false headline figures reported by the newspapers.
The conclusion stated earlier has been verified. Labour has lost. It has long been in the public domain.
I find the language used insulting. To doubters I say, check your facts before your bias blinds you to the evidence before your eyes.
It has been claimed by some that to report the truth, is to ramp. Ramping is a stock market related term. Just as we lift a car with a car ramp, a ramper inflates the price of a stock artificially through false news. By this they imply the outcome of the election is being incorrectly ‘called’ by false news from the ramper. However for this to be a valid claim the news doubtable. It should not be possible to independently verify it. Sources must be non-existent.
The evidence you seek is not hard to find. Look at this site, and remind yourself of repeated warning from senior Labour party figures on national television, hear again those endless warning from BBC journalists on national television – ‘something is seriously wrong’, ‘ Labour sources say the facts on the ground are wholly at odds with the experience on the doorstep – they find no lead’.
They were simply forewarning of what was to come. Labour had lost and they knew it.
Furthermore, it is suggested that doubters go to ICM’s own website and check there raw data. The maths is not too complex. The headline figures generated by the same maths ICM used in 1997 and 2001, generate consistent and decisive Conservative leads through the campaign, and most of 2004. YouGov have repeatedly confessed to making the same ‘alterations’ to generate the false headline figures reported by the newspapers.
The conclusion stated earlier has been verified. Labour has lost. It has long been in the public domain.
I find the language used insulting. To doubters I say, check your facts before your bias blinds you to the evidence before your eyes.
Some posters, not only do they post long totally ridiculous posts, they post them twice! Harumph.
43. And why exactly is it in the interest of polling organisations to deliberately get it wrong? Sounds like a pretty poor business model to me.
“Calm down, Dear! It’s only an election!!”
From PtP, with apologies to Michael Winner.
Looks like someone else has been taken in by Campbell and Blair’s talk of things being very close.
A cunning plan indeed.
If many more have been taken in, we could indeed be looking at a Labour majority of around 120.
One thing that is worth pointing out among the “ramping” debate. In 1997, Labour got 13,518,184 votes. In 2001 Labour got 10,724,835 votes , in 1983 Labour got 8,457,854. (source Keele)
Labour lost 2,793,349 votes between 1997 and 2001.
If they lose 2,266,981 votes this time they are back to 1983 levels.
BUT even if they did, it dosen’t mean anything unless overall turnout is static or up. If turnout is down significantly, Labour could still get another landslide despite getting less votes than in 1983. (errors and omissions from hand typing excepted).
The lesson is that between 1983 and 2001, the conservative vote was far more volatile.
I’m liking the look of Mike’s 132-1 bet on the LibDems
So what alcoholic beverages are we consuming tonight? I shall be starting off with a nice white rioja, I will then be moving onto vodka to try to numb the pain of the results.
Bill at 43 - are you smoking what I’m smoking?
Well Bill if your right and you seem pretty confident in your prediction, why don’t you bet your house on the result?
IMO you are away with the fairies
50. Looks like Bill’s started drinking already. I’ve currently got a heavy cold so I’m sticking to Lemsips.
Just Diet Coke and the BBC for me, I will be up late, it’s one of the best nights or am I just sad
54 - I have booked tomorrow off to recover - now that is sad.
We have 8 bottles of white Rioja and 8 of red, sitting ready for a convivial election night soiree…. lots of Lab to LD switchers attending so if Howard comes in by my back door they can deal with him!!!
I prefer the BBC for election night (but will flick over now again) my partner will be watching footballers wives (I know!) Does the BBC’s coverage start at 9.55?
43. Bill, for goodness sake take your medicine, quick! You’re having one of your turns.
I’ve got a stag do tomorrow, so i’ve got the day off…..thats my excuse, anyway….
55, Me too, I always have the day after off.
Bill it was your post at 12 that was the ramp
56 - Sounds like you are going to have a fun evening whatever the result!
57 - Yes. The exit poll is scheduled to be broadcast at 10.01.
35 - er no… unless I misunderstand your point in your post. It is unlikely there will be many constituencies (apart from those which delay until the next day because of geographical considerations) which will not have reported by around 6am at the latest. The times for Richmond Yorks and Derbyshire South seem reasonable.
The BBC schedule:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4513703.stm#list
I can’t understand why bill hasn’t hoovered up all the big prices on the exchanges.
A flurry of entries this p.m. to the H&K COMPETITION - from some wise contributors to this site and others . . . winners picked for each of the selected seats show a disparate range of views, and a continued disbelief of the polls -and in all directions: Wiltshire North to go yellow? Shipley to remain red? Cons to take Gloucester?? Such a range of answers means there must still be a good chance of wining a PRIZE of one of the many bottles of champagne etc so - the and the DEADLINE for entries is 9pm at the latest. SEE the LINK BELOW . . .
64, Perhaps he is the mystery punter laying out £2000 grand on a Tory victory in two different betting shops?
If bill is right that would give the tories a majority of 12 and IMHO a repeat of the 1992-7 fiasco according to Mr Snows Swingometer. I hope he is wrong. I want no overall majority. Its time the executive lost a lot of power to parliament.
Hills are still offering 15/8 on Labour to win with majority below 80. Worth doing ?
A most interesting article from Anatole Kaletsky. If the result is as expected (Kill Bill notwithstanding!)then this may be a fortaste. A clip “When the campaign started Mr Blair was clearly the most unpopular figure public figure in Britain. Mr Howards extraordinary achievment was to build himself up into a politician the British public could dislike even more….”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1061-1598149,00.html
It seems Anatole Kaletsky has bet on a 160 labour majority.
Actually 80
But that is what’s interesting about the article. It has a betting theme.
69: Kaletsky was also advising the Tories to give George W. Bush style tax cuts to the rich a few weeks back. I’m not sure that would have lifted Michael Howard into the realm of mass public adulation either.
73, That plan was the next stage, part of the hidden agenda no doubt
The Tories could have been in an even bigger mess than they are, argues the “anonymous commentator” over at the Social Affairs Unit. Just after the Howard Flight story broke another story nearly broke about a whole string of Tory whips and frontbench spokesmen - who at a private meeting discussed/proposed that the Tories’ real agenda should be withdrawl from the EU. After sacking Howard Flight, he would have to have sacked many of his MPs. The story would have been published but was spiked by the Daily Mail to help the Tories. What a mess it could have been!
Link: http://www.socialaffairsunit.org.uk/blog/archives/000420.php
I still think Labour will suffer from voter apathy, and either not vote, or vote Lib Dem. I think a swave of Tory voters (who have not played a part in 97 and 01) will boost the Tory votes, but a number will switch to Lib Dem. Overall, Labour down on votes, Tory and Lib Dem way up.
Whether this is enough for seats to swing, we’ll have to wait and see, but Rossendale & Darwen should be interesting, as a good swing from Lab to Lib Dem and a higher turnout could say bye bye for Janet Anderson and the Tories will reclaim it back after losing it in 97. It all depends on the 3 minority other parties that have chosen to stand who will steal some votes from the 3 main parties.
http://www.vote2005forum.org.uk (updated with results from midnight…) Discuss turnout and how your constituency will vote. Predict the winner.
76, There are unconfirmed reports of large scale shaky hand syndrome, which tends to chime with my opinion, when people get in the polling booth can they really risk letting the Tories in, it’s a risk many people will not take, however we will see tonight.
77 - Perhaps it’s the other way around in some situations, planning to vote Labour for the sole reason of stopping the Tories, but when they get in the polling booth, they think “Can I really trust this pathetic liar ever again?”.
77 - of course that’s not ramping…
79, No just read todays posts from all over the site, not saying it is true, don’t know
78 Who Knows?
the only point left to resolve - Labour or tory leader to go first ?
1/4 howard
11/4 blair
form a queue here -
81. That Gary Barford seems a nice bloke, Rob. Friend of yours?
77- I think large scale is a little bit of an exaggeration if it is based upon the postings on this site. We are talking of an electorate of 44 million.
I suspect however there will be a fair bit of shaky hand syndrome among core labour voters, but those who switched from Con to Lab in ‘97 will not be so likely to suffer from this syndrome.
Someome called “Ian” is saying much the same sort of thing as “Bill” (12)has here on Anthony wells site. Still very sceptical about it.
85 - I’ve noticed that “Ian” and “Bill” are making the same kinds of spelling and grammatical errors, as well as having the same kinds of pessimistic Labour “contacts”. Coincidence?
Someone on the bbc has clearly misread the estimated declaration times! They keep saying, (including on the website link) that the first declaration will be at around 11.30. Have I missed something or didn’t Sunderland South manage it in 43 minutes last time?
And I’ve noticed that the emphatic trashing/ridiculing of ‘bad news for Labour’ postings owes more to nerves and grawing feelings in the guts than cool-headed analysis….
87 - afaik a lot of declarations will be delayed as they will have to filter out votes for local councils in many places. Sunderland south to the best of my knowledge is not one. (mainly county councils afaik)
Obviously Bill or Ian has sold Labour seats. The report backs I have from two marginals is that turnout is about the same as last time, but obviously if you factor in the fact that the number of postal votes is much higher this would suggest and increase on last time. Of course, I don’t believe the old stuff that higher turnout automtically benefits Labour, in the US presidential elections everyone got excited about the higher turnout and assumed on the day that Kerry was going to win, but turnout was up for both sides.
83 - Just suggesting a logical alternative. It is actually possible that the dislike for Blair will outweigh the dislike of the Tories. Note I say possible, I do not presume anything.
87 - I think they could just be putting down a “safe” declaration time, what it could be expected to be if they were not making a race of it. It looks like they are sourcing them from the Press Association - http://election.press.net/constituencies_time.html
88 Anyone claiming to have secret information that will cost some people here thousands if true is not going to be popular unless they can provide sources to back it up
Everybody is twitchy at this time. What a certain Manchester-based Scot calls “squeaky bum time”. Think we should all calm down. If that’s possible. And the drink, Red Bull, of course. Just in case I’m not over-hyped already!
Just got back from Oxford East where my parents semi-involved with local Lib Dems. The effort by Lib Dems is huge in what was a safe Lab seat and the Lib Dems seem to be happy with the way it is going. Maybe the huge Lib Dem posters saying Winning Here will be correct.
Having a bit of a break from GOTV stuff. Bill’s earlier comments seem way off beam to me but then everyones experience is subjective. From the people I have talked today canvassing info seems as accurate as normal and there is certainly no reluctance to vote lab.
From what I have seen the polls are broadly right with one or two odd results likely I guess the libs picking up seat both unexpected tory and lab seats.
Well isn’t this fun? One of the things I like about it is that actually no-one on here has a blo*dy clue what is happening! Not a clue. We think the opinion polls are probably right, but they’ve been badly wrong before so we just don’t know. Fortunately we can all spot a ramper when we see one, or at least usually we can. The only thing I’d say is that Labour would have been a lot more anxious looking if they thought they were about to lose. Hubris would be marvellous .. but ’tis unlikely.
Anyway, still think the Tories will take my seat of Devon West & Torridge from the LibDems but we shall see. We shall see.
I’m glad i’ve stayed out of the serious betting game. Either way some people will be having a terrible night. Betting is not the same as predicting. I’m sure in 1992 people were betting on Labour, and in 1997 betting on a smaller Labour majority than they actually got. Those who backed the Tories in 92, had Labour winning big in 1997 were ridiculed for doing so.
Have looked at Anthony Wells and 100 per cent convinced “Bill” and “Ian” are one and the same. Of course, he/they might be right on the button. But nobody else at all, anywhere, seems to be getting that info
88, No you misunderstand, it started at post 12, which was a ramp, read it and see what you think, but the truth be known nobody knows what is going to happen, untill 10.01 exit poll then we will have a good idea, was the exit poll wrong in 92? I can not remember
Aboslutely no movement in the IG voting shares. If people knew different I’m sure that money would be moving the market. I’ll be watching the spreads keenly after 8pm when some people will definitely have the best information so far in the campaign.
Re. 50 - my election night tipple is Carolan’s Irish liqueur. Strong enougn to get me gently merry, but not strong enough to get me so p*ssed that I can’t understand the results. Berore that, of course, it’s strong fresh coffee to help me stay up till dawn.
101, I might manage till 3 or 4 am, but dawn that would be oushing it for me
99. The ‘92 exit poll had the Tories ahead with Labour having performed well in the marginals. The forecast Tory lead was about 3%, I think, much less than the 8% that it turned out to be when the real votes had been counted.
Sorry to be a bore about this but what about 97 and 2001? it’s just that when it does come out this place will be alive!
Over the past 2 days there has been a very decisive move in David Davis’s favour on IG binary. He is now at 73%.
92. How “sourced” is sourced? (I have heard something, and the source is good, but I can’t name them and I don’t want to be accused of ramping.)
Aristotle I think you are well known enough on here not to accused of that, rumers are grist to the mill, anyway now you have started you might as well tell us, and then we can accuse you of ramping
Aristotle,
Just tell us and allow us to make our own judgement. By the way Chrisco, I apologise for not getting back to you re CK’s view on coalitions - you were right and I as wrong - but I had to go out and have not looked at the message board for a few days.
Come on Aristotle you can’t do that to us
108. No worries Armageddon; I knew I was right anyway…
OK…
I am told the first (early hours) exit polls have a Tory lead.
Don’t know numbers. I am trying to get more.
105. That said, it has just moved 2 points back towards the Lib Dems, but it’s still very much in his favour.
short and interesting.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labour/comment/0,9236,1476650,00.html
111 - remember, remember the 2nd of November! My advice based on that experience is buy the rumour, sell the fact.
104. robert, in 2001 the exit polls were quite right.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/vote2001/hi/english/opinion_polls/newsid_1386000/1386861.stm (go down the page linked to see them)
104. The exit polls in 1997 and 2001 were largely carried out in marginals and projected seats rather than national vote shares.
1997 ITN MORI Lab 159 majority
1997 BBC NOP Lab c. 200 majority
2001 ITN MORI Lab 417 Con 155 LD 58 Majority 175
2001 BBC NOP Lab 408 Con 175 LD 44 Majority 155
So they were all fairly close and a mid-point between the two on both occasions would have been almost spot on.
115. The exit polls couldn’t fail to be wrong, considering the wide gulf that existed between Labour and the Conservatives during the election, likewise in 1997
doorstep this p.m. seemed to confirm expectations based on other evidence - negligible switch to Tories, Lab doubters splitting between coming ‘home’ and LD. Suspect lowish swing to LD in ‘well established’ marginals, much bigger elsewhere.
115. A great quote from that site: ‘Robert Worcester of Mori published some highly sceptical remarks about the methodology of Rasmussen, but the latter emerged with a. better record than his own company.’
111, See the other board it seems to have come from Rush Limbaugh well known right winger, I don’t see how it can be true as they won’t be finished yet
I’m a Conservative Party member so discount my words if you wish. I can’t stand wishful thinkers and fantasists because they impede information gathering so I would only rely on people I consider serious. Here’s three straws in the wind: (1) Hardheaded candidate in Lab marginal in Kent - sees quite steady turn out in all areas/Lab. tellers reporting ‘a fair few’ defections to Lib Dems/Tories pleased with GOTV. (2) Long time activist in safe-ish Tory seat in Bucks - very good postal votes for Tories/Lib Dems to overtake Lab for (3) Hampshire Tory seat non-activist mate - surprising hyperactivity from Lib Dems - going door-to-door to labour supporters brandishing newspaper article naming seat as one Libs ‘could win’. Make of it all what you will.
120. Robert, in these last hours we will probably hear all sort of rumours. Even that the Greens are set to gain 10 seats!
This Tory lead in the exit polls seems to be a rumour that is spreading, it is totally unverifiable. I would ignore it until there is confirmation, ramping on American radio is a good way to get info seeping into the market over here, as people may think that foreign radio may be able to broadcast these results.
My only opinion is that I would be suprised if turnout is not increased this time, there was a sizable queue at my PS in Bosworth.
122 It’s all to much now I am going out for a walk
124 - agreed.
125. While you’re walking, try to think to a new improbable rumour.
Re: Tory lead in exit polls. From my own experience as a teller/activist, I would say that it is nothing to worry Labour about. Most early voters are older people, who tend to vote Tory anyway. Lab & Lib Dems tend to vote after work. Stay calm, people. The market never lies.
128. The Betfair market lied in the US election until about midnight!
129 - that’s because the leaked exit polls did!
The Evening Standard quotes a private Conservative poll which shows a 146 Labour majority.
130 - Betting markets relect how much money people are placing on things. If one candidate has 10x the money on him than the other then he will have much shorter odds.
The bookies make money because the favourite does not always win. While individual payouts to high odds candidates may be large, on aggregate the bookies pay out far more in a multitude of lower sums if the favourite wins.
If the tories DID win the bookies would have a very very good night.
131 - That would be roughly consistent with the following shares of the vote (according to the BBC Calculator)
38% Labour
30% Conservative
24% LIb Dem
8% Others
127, had a walk past polling station (2 near me we have to go to the further one) steady trickle of people but not mobbed.
Can’t think of any rumour I would like to start
I don’t know what to make of it, but a friend of mine in the states says that C-SPAN are also reporting the Tory Exit Poll Lead Story. Though, a) they probably just picked it up from the disgusting Mr. Limbaugh and b) vote share doesn’t matter, it’s all about the marginals.
135, I do not make much of it,
Re shaky hand syndrome: I went in to the booth determined to vote LD, and couldn’t bring myself to do it. Pathetic, and I do wonder how many others had a similar experience.
Just returned from voting,polling station busy but it’s a strong Tory ward - I think the bookmakers have judged it right - I will be very interested in the Lib Dem/Con marginals and how the Bnp perform,hopefully not very well at all but somehow I don’t really think so - obviously interested in the County election but these will be overshadowed.My bets are centred around Tories and Lib Dems taking seats off Labour and being fairly neutral to each other.Best of luck every one on your bets.
137. Don’t worry Melv, I made up for you by voting Lib Dem twice…
135 - It will begin to matter if the Tories win the majority of the vote but labour still have a large majority.
For those not believing the ’shaky hand syndrome’, believe me there are plenty of people discussing having planned on voting LD, but deciding to vote Lab at the last minute on the football site I visit regularly (the Red Issue Sanctuary - Red Issue being a Manchester United forum, not a socialst forum - note, it is a subscription web site at http://www.redissueforums.co.uk)
I was surprised how many people said they had gone into the booth, genuinely undecided, but had decided to vote Labour, as to not let the Tories back in.
A few thoughts:
1. If a US source says Conservatives ahead does he mean Blair?
2. More generally are the tories ahead (IF they are) because they are up or Lab are down? The second possibility would fit the straws in the wind saying the LD’s are doing well (at Lab expense?.
3. But I agree that even if true it tells us nothing because early voters are probably older and more Conservative.
142. The LDs would have to be in the high-20s to pull Labour down that far, and as much as I would like to see it, I just can’t…
I presume all those who are now predicting a Con winhave quite a sum of money on the tories winning at 20 / 1.
If the Tories win it’ll be the best thing since 1992!!!!!NO WAY are they in with a chance, too much LD damage going on I think. Its those voting for the LD’s that will keep Labour in with another big majority, at the expense of the Tories, is my personal view. I hope I’m wrong but I’m trying to prepare myself for a bad night.
Update from Putney: Very busy polling at 7pm. Long queues and at least 30 people inside. Afraid I convinced my wife to vote Lab when she was considering LibDems. All that “info” about Tory push on pb.com!
Sitting in Northern Ireland, if anybody is looking for last minute bets on the rather unique poll over here, the story for the elections in the press has been of a total meltdown for the SDLP and Ulster Unionists. Paddy Power were apparently offering a straight bet of 5/4 the Ulster Unionists holding one seat and 7/4 on 2. I honestly think they will make 2 and possibly 3, defying the perception that they’ll get pretty much wiped out. Just an observation of many years on the scene rather than any party inspired loyalty. If one of you mathematical geniuses can calculate up what odds are available out there may be a bet with a small profit to be made with a low downside. Counting here is traditonally done on Friday….we like our beds here..
As regards the election that really matters..in England….I have a deep suspicicion Tony will make it with pretty much bang on 100 majority (I’d be a Tory if I was voting there by the way). Here is the thing though, what is better for those who support the Tories really? A small Labour majority which could lead to the awkward squad putting the clamps on some elements of labours more right wing agenda (eg tougher law & order measures) or a big majority where Tony & his minsters can ride roughshod over everyone again